right emotions, bless him for his mercies, and the glow of gratitude subside in our hearts the moment our prayer is ended? Can we give up the disposal of our lot to him in the true temper of Christian trust, and the world the next moment fill our hearts with disquietude, and load our tongues with complaint? Who will confess his sins, with a genuine self-abasing penitence, and turn away to repeat them; ask earnestly for grace to perform a duty, and pass by on the other side, as he goes from the closet of prayer; implore heartily a blessing on his friends or enemies with one breath, and in the next distress the one or traduce the other? It cannot be. Real prayer calls into action the most excellent feelings of our nature, and it is not a characteristic of these to die away as soon as they have been excited. Real prayer is close communion with God, and if the prophet's face, of old, shone with an intolerable brightness, when he came down from the mount, where the Lord arrayed himself in material splendor, the Christian's heart, when he comes from audience before the throne of grace, is invested with a more radiant glory, before which every unnerved power of temptation retreats or is consumed.

We should pray, I ought further to urge, because prayer is one of the noblest employments, and affords some of the sublimest sa.isfactions, of that nature which is placed but a little lower than the rank of angels. But on so fruitful a subject, as the pleasures of devotion, I have left myself no time to enter. Let me only say, that prayer is the attention of the mind to the infinitely most magnificent object of contemplation; and if we derive pleasure from the varied beauties of nature and

discoveries of truth, how much more must needs be afforded by contemplation of the glorious archetype, of which these are but faint and imperfect transcripts. Prayer is the direction of the affections to their infinitely worthiest object; and if we scarcely know a higher happiness, than is derived from loving and serving those who partially deserve it, who partially meet the claims of our judgments and our hearts, what enjoyment may we not promise ourselves, from teaching them to ascend to Him, whose perfections alone are a subject of thorough approbation, boundless wonder, inexhaustible delight. Devotion is the spirit, and in no small part, we are led to believe, the occupation of heaven. If we do not form a relish for it here, we may not hope, for we are not able to enjoy it there. But with minds deeply imbued with the spirit of devotion, the spirit of immortals, we anticipate their happiness while we are not yet admitted to their society. We have a foretaste below of the bliss for whose consummation we look above, the bliss of those who stand before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple.

BY THIS WE BELIEVE, THAT THOU CAMEST FORTH FROM GOD,

In Dr Paley's celebrated statement of the argument for the existence of God, he adopts a mode of reasoning which may be applied, with equal clearness and force, to the evidences of Christianity. Suppose, says he, that in crossing a heath, I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how it came there, I might answer, without exposing myself to the charge of absurdity, that it had been lying there forever; but if, on the other hand, I had found a watch, and the same question were asked, I should be obliged to answer that it was the work of an intelligent and skilful artificer. The argument, you perceive, rests upon the fact, that corresponding products are to be referred to similar causes. The stone alluded to by Dr Paley, possessed none of the properties, to which we are accustomed in works of

art.

There was no curious organization, no complicated machinery, no adaptation of means to ends, no finished and delicate workmanship, and hence there was no reason for ascribing its production to the skill of an

artizan. It bore no resemblance to the products of his ingenuity. It possessed nothing in common with them, which would authorize the supposition that it was the work of the same hand. The watch, on the contrary, exhibited all the qualities which we are used to observing in the products of intelligence and skill. It was clearly made for some purpose, it bore the marks of evident design, and all its curious arrangements plainly fitted it for the production of the intended effect. It accordingly resembled, in its essential properties, those works which are admitted to be the fruits of ingenuity and art, and it would therefore, be a fair procedure to refer the watch itself to a similar cause. No one, who has ever read Dr Paley, can have failed to be struck with the simplicity and force of this argument, in its application to the great topics of Natural Theology, but I wish at this time, to direct your attention particularly to the principle, which is at the bottom of it. The principle is, that when we admit a given product to be the work of a certain author, a second product similar to the first must be admitted to be the work of the same author. In the schools of art, for instance, the productions of Michael Angelo are acknowledged to possess a distinctive character, which it would be difficult for a connoisseur to mistake. Now if a painting were to be discovered, among the remains of the old masters, bearing all the characteristics of his style, with such power and originality as to preclude the idea of a modern imitation, it would be an irresistible conclusion to infer that he was the author. It would be impossible to suppose, that two different works, which bore the same impress